Five charged with poaching following incident near Amesbury
Reply
Monthly Archives: June 2025
How Bird Flu Became a Human Pandemic Threat
Anti-hunting activists push big banks to discriminate
by Larry Keane
6:00am Monday, June 23, 2025
Anti-hunting, anti-animal agriculture activists are deploying a new tactic in their crusade in the United States. They are failing to get their way through democratic, voter-approved legislative channels and are often on the losing end of judicial, court-based lawfare attempts so they are turning to a new option — big banks.
Just at the time when President Donald Trump successfully urged major banking institutions to abandon their previously held politics-based lending protocols to discriminate against politically disfavored industries, including the lawful and highly regulated firearm industry, anti-hunting animal-rights groups are pushing them in the opposite direction and back toward a policy of denying banking services and financial products to disfavored businesses.
Gun control groups had recently made some temporary inroads by getting the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) to create a gun-related merchant category code (MCC) for credit and debit card companies to use to track cardholders’ purchases of firearms and ammunition. Banks largely announced they would not move forward with implementing the code. Now animal-rights activists at organizations like the Humane World for Animals are pushing similar discrimination efforts on the global financial system to penalize animal agriculture businesses.
Humane discrimination
Humane World for Animals, a new animal-rights conglomerate comprising the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and Humane Society International, published a blog on their website describing a new global financial utopia. Their idea is that large banking institutions join in their animal-rights crusade by denying banking and financial services to animal agriculture businesses to “transform the future of food.”
“It is therefore immensely important that considerations of animal welfare and a shift toward plant-forward food systems are integrated into core financing and investing strategies,” Humane World CEO Cristobel “Kitty” Block wrote. “That’s why we at Humane World for Animals work with financial institutions to integrate higher animal welfare and plant-forward strategies into their core funding policies and practices. Our goals are clear: Improve the lives of animals currently in production and stem the growth in the number of animals kept and killed for food.”
New Class: Protecting Houses of Worship – July 20, 2025
She called out several banks, including those based in the United States, for failing to take stronger stands on animal rights and not implementing Humane World’s favored policies.
“Yet, referencing IFC standards is not the same as implementing them. Many major financial players, such as Citigroup, Bank of America, Barclays, JP Morgan Chase, HSBC, Santander and Credit Suisse, among others still lack any public-facing commitments to animal welfare,” Block blogged.
Some big banks balked at the notion. Block noted that two major financial institutions weren’t playing ball with her animal-rights, anti-hunting agenda.
“Recent shareholder resolutions at Bank of America and Citigroup asked these institutions to disclose how they manage material risks related to poor animal welfare,” Block carped. “Both boards opposed the proposals and signaled no intention to address the issue publicly. That’s not just disappointing, it’s dangerous.”
Good on both Bank of America and Citigroup for rejecting that nonsense. Relatedly, Citigroup recently announced it was no longer implementing its long-held policy of discrimination against lawful and highly-regulated firearm industry members that manufacture and sell legal, Constitutionally-protected firearms. Bank of America CEO Bryan Moynihan was called out by name for his bank’s discriminatory practices by President Trump at the World Economic Forum earlier this year. It seems both banks could be taking the hint and rightfully correcting their course.
Angling for change
Block’s Humane World doesn’t sound like banking institutions are anywhere close to considering her organization’s radical animal-rights agenda. Her screed turns to desperation about the future and Humane World’s continued actions.
“Financial institutions have a choice. They can continue to fund systems that harm animals, people and the planet, or they can lead the transition to a more humane and sustainable future,” Block added.
Block and other animal-rights activists haven’t been holding back their punches in their attack on animal agriculture businesses, which provide healthy, affordable, and needed food to millions and millions of people here in the United States.
Separate from Humane World, though populated with many of the same activists, new groups are popping up to push similar anti-hunting, anti-science policies in the states and in Washington, D.C. Last year, animal-rights activists launched a new advocacy group, the Wilberforce Institute, aimed at trying to convert pro-hunting Americans over to the animal-rights ideology. The group is connected to Washington, D.C., lobbyist Marty Irby, who spent six years working for the Humane Society of the United States and Wayne Pacelle before launching his own political action committee funded by animal-rights activists. The group’s political goals include banning traditional ammunition for hunting and using frivolous lawsuits to tie up businesses.
Even though Irby tries to make it appear as though he supports conservative, pro-hunting, pro-Second Amendment elected officials, he spent years as executive director of Animal Wellness Action (AWA). AWA’s political spending reveals the organization spent huge to defeat pro-hunting conservatives and instead elect anti-hunting and gun control-supporting progressives, according to OpenSecrets. It’s yet to be seen what real, meaningful impact, if any, Irby’s group has had.
Courts side with science
History has shown that where voters reject their activist agendas and banks shrug off their financial discrimination demands, the anti-hunting, anti-science animal-rights activists will gladly turn to the courts in hopes of catching a long-shot Hail Mary. Fortunately, in recent court decisions, judges have also rejected these farcical attempts, though they are costly to those involved.
Most recently, the Washington-based animal-rights group Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) was handed yet another court defeat in their attempts to have judges rule that elephants that are in the care of zoos are organisms with “personhood” rights. The cases have been in courts for years, and the judge’s most recent rejection was another defeat for the group.
If the courts had decided that the elephants involved, or any other animal in monitored and beneficial care, did indeed possess personhood rights, the floodgate would open for future lawsuits against other zoos, farms, and pet owners. Animal-rights groups could sue dairy cow or meat-processing operations, pig farms, or chicken or pheasant preserves. The New York Farm Bureau even submitted an amicus brief in favor of a related Bronx Zoo case in 2022, warning that a ruling in NhRP’s favor could be disastrous, writing “Worse, if any of those habeas petitions succeed in securing the release or transfer of livestock … the downstream effects also would be serious.”
All of that would mean severe obstacles to hunters harvesting wild game and the wildlife management biologists that rely on hunting as a wildlife conservation management tool. And say goodbye to your family dog.
This is the goal of these animal-rights activists in groups like NhRP, the Wilberforce Institute, and Humane World. They want to use any tools available — the courts, the ballot box, or now increasingly the major banking institutions — to push their radical anti-hunting, anti-gun animal-rights agenda. The downstream cost is of no concern to them. It’s their way or the highway, and fortunately — at least for the time being — major banking institutions are telling them to take a hike.
Good news for brown bears (so far) in Lithuania & British Columbia
June 23, 2025 By Merritt Clifton 1 Comment
Tex, the wandering grizzly bear of Texada.
(Beth Clifton collage)
Brown bear macked into Lithuanian capital city, but was not shot; Texada Island grizzly is also still alive & well
VILNIUS, Lithuania; TEXADA ISLAND, British Columbia, Canada––A two-year-old female European brown bear in mid-June 2025 found her own way out of trouble in Vilnius, the capital city of Lithuania.
Whether her distant cousin, a four-year-old British Columbia grizzly, can do likewise on sparsely populated Texada Island in the Georgia Strait, north of Vancouver, remains to be seen.
Both bears have found unexpected friends and allies, after turning up in most unexpected places.
Hunters refused to kill the Vilnius bear
“For two days, the female brown bear ambled through the neighborhoods of Vilnius, trotted across highways and explored backyards — all while being chased by onlookers with smartphones and, eventually, drones,” reported Vanessa Gera for Associated Press on June 19, 2025.
“The government then issued a permit for the bear to be shot and killed,” Gera wrote.
Surprisingly, the membership of the Lithuanian Association of Hunters & Fishers refused to do the shooting.
Lithuanian Association of Hunters & Fishers chief executive Ramutė Juknytė, told Gera, she paraphrased, that the bear was young, beautiful, and did not deserve to be shot.
“She didn’t do anything bad”
“She was scared but not aggressive,” Juknytė said. “She didn’t know how to escape the city, but she didn’t do anything bad.”
Juknytė told Gera that there are probably only five to ten bears in all of Lithuania, a nation about the size of the U.S. state of Virginia, on the east coast of the Baltic Sea, opposite Sweden, bordering Latvia, Belarus, and Poland.
The bear wandered within two to three miles of the Vilnius city center before discovering a safe route to the countryside.
“Juknytė said that the bear was recorded by a camera peacefully wandering through a forest some 40 miles from Vilnius while munching on corn,” Gera reported.
Lithuania has only recently regained bears, a protected species within the European Union, after losing a historically native bear population to hunting and habitat destruction in the 19th century.
Texada bear swam to an island without bears
Meanwhile in British Columbia, the Texada bear swam to the island, which has historically not had a bear population, after running into considerable trouble on the mainland.
The third largest island in the Georgia Strait region, Texada has only three small settled areas, all on the northwestern quadrant of the island, linked by one paved road, with a total human population of about 1,200 and no major industry.
A misfit grizzly bear could make a good home there, albeit a lonely home, with no prospective mate. But would he stay there for long, and stay out of trouble?
“The grizzly roaming Texada Island has been identified as the same bear relocated from both Gibsons and Sechelt last year,” reported Sandra Thomas for the Coast Reporter on June 14, 2025.
The British Columbia Conservation Officer Service, “with support from provincial wildlife biologists and Shíshálh Nation,” Thomas explained, “relocated this grizzly bear twice in 2024 – on September 5 from Gibsons and September 27 from Sechelt – to remote coastal habitat as part of extensive efforts to avoid conflict with people.
“Problem” grizzly being relocated deeper into wild habitat.
(U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service photo)
“A unique ear tag”
“As part of that process,” Thomas said, “a unique ear tag was placed on the bear for future identification purposes.”
The young grizzly was relocated first after having been seen “roaming around Elphinstone Secondary School in Gibsons, and downtown in the daytime,” Thomas said.
Twice moved to locations on Jervis inlet, “On both occasions, the grizzly bear returned to urban areas along the Sunshine Coast within weeks,” Thomas recounted.
“Recently,” Thomas continued, “the bear spent several days in Powell River, breaking into fishing boats at marinas to access bait.
“Displayed aggressive behavior”
“On May 22, 2025, in Powell River, the bear displayed aggressive behavior by stalking two residents while walking on a trail. The people escaped by entering and remaining in the water for half an hour while the bear remained on shore circling back and forth.
“The grizzly bear tore up one of their jackets on shore before leaving.
“On May 28, 2025, on Texada Island,” Thomas continued, “the grizzly bear stalked a resident walking home with her horse and dog for half a kilometer. Then multiple sightings of the grizzly bear, including near a school, store, and farms, were also reported on the island.
“On June 10 and 11 on Texada Island,” Thomas said, “conservation officers responded to a complaint of a grizzly bear chasing livestock,” but no livestock were actually attacked.
“There is a ‘no kill’ order”
“According to a joint statement from provincial legislative representative Randene Neill, and environment minister Tamara Davidson,” Thomas detailed, “there is a ‘no kill’ order for the bear.”
But if the Texada bear gets into trouble again, he will be shot.
British Columbia policy, Thomas explained, “forbids translocating adult bears outside their natural home ranges, and bears will only be relocated short distances where there is no or very limited indication of food conditioning, and no indication of aggressiveness.”
John Powell, elected chief of Mamalilikulla First Nation, hopes to persuade British Columbia officials to amend that rule, to relocate the Texada bear to Knight Inlet, within Mamalilikulla territory.
“Right now this grizzly bear is a ticking time bomb,” Powell told Darron Kloster of the Vancouver Times Colonist.
“Texada is not a big place”
“I think inevitably the bear is going to run into a human or animal and is going to have a negative engagement. Texada is not a big place,” Powell said.
“Powell said he knows there is support on Texada to privately fund a relocation,” Kloster recounted. “His First Nation would welcome the grizzly, he said. The nation’s traditional territories span the North Island and extend into Knight Inlet on the mainland coast west of the Broughton Archipelago.
“He said younger bears are often forced out of their territories by older bears. Knight Inlet, home to few humans, already has grizzlies, including a younger female grizzly being monitored by Mamalilikulla guardians,” wrote Kloster.
“The female grizzly, also age four, was cut loose recently by her mother and could make a good mate for the male on Texada, said Powell,” Kloster reported.
“Powell said he is unsure how a relocation would unfold,” Kloster continued, “but tranquilizing the grizzly and flying him out would be the best option, especially if there are people on Texada who have agreed to cover the cost.
“We have stories about grizzlies”
“Powell said grizzlies have a spiritual and cultural connection for the Mamalilikulla First Nation, which has its traditional home at Village Island, offices in Campbell River and about 400 members,” Kloster detailed.
Said Powell, “We have stories about grizzlies, masks of them. At one time, the grizzly played the part of policeman in our big houses. All the creatures from land, sea and sky are considered our siblings and it’s our responsibility to take care of them.
“This bear isn’t in our territory, but we’d like it to be.”
Added Powell to Robin Grant of the Campbell River Mirror, “From a First Nation’s perspective, and especially from the Mamalilikulla’s perspective, all the animals from the land are our brothers and sisters. If my brother or sister is in trouble, I would try to help.
“I just hope that whatever the outcome is from this, it’s not an outcome that is going to break hearts or cost lives,” Powell finished.
Bear education cuts toll in half
Sport hunters kill about 250 to 350 grizzly bears per year in British Columbia, along with about 5,000 black bears.
British Columbia bears who run into conflict with humans are routinely shot, including a mother black bear with cubs, who on June 12, 2025 swatted the side of a Maple Ridge woman’s head after meeting the woman unexpectedly at the woman’s trash can.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police shot the mother bear at the scene. The British Columbia Conservation Officer Service was at last report still looking for the cubs.
Beth & Merritt Clifton.
(Gene Chontos photo)
The British Columbia government, however, has since September 2024 partnered with the Grizzly Bear Foundation to reduce the bear toll from accidental conflicts, after killing 603 black bears and 23 grizzly bears in 2023.
The 2024 black bear toll from accidental conflict dropped to 303; the grizzly bear toll dropped to zero.
Bear complaints to the British Columbia Conservation Officer Service reportedly fell by 10,000.
Exposing the Big Game 
